Talk:Lord Eldon (1801 ship)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lord Eldon (1801 ship) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Shipwrecks

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

Military history: Maritime / British / European / Napoleonic era Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792 – 1815)

It is requested that an image or photograph of this ship, either in a painting, as a model, or a line drawing be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in the United Kingdom may be able to help!
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

B5 criteria assessment - discussion about lack of images

Hi all, got feedback (in my talk page) about my assessment on B5 criteria, that will copy to this talk page as seems more appropriate for discussing it. Due to being busy in real life now, will proceed at most tomorrow. Regards, DPdH (talk) 12:12, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Dear DPdH, I must say I am mystified by your classifying this ship article as "Start" rather than "B". (Note: I don't care how you classify MilHist articles.) I have had great difficulty finding photographs from before photography was invented. Some line drawings do exist, but almost exclusively of military vessels, and even then rarely for small vessels. (I have checked the NMM so I am pretty sure of this.) Similarly, paintings are rare, absent a dramatic disaster, or a chance painting of warships and large vessels. Your application of the criteria mean that almost no article on an age of sail vessel, no matter how long or well researched, could ever go beyond Start class. What really irks me is that the "B" class criteria for ship articles read for B5: "It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams." (Emphasis added.) The key word though is "OR", which is not "AND". It is very discouraging to spend hours on an article scanning through Lloyd's Register, the Register of Shipping, Lloyd's List, lists of vessels from the period, etc., to create a relatively long article, one that is highly referenced, only to have some one drive by and declare it a "Start", in defiance of the classification criteria. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 17:09, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! I came over here for the same reason. As you say, an infobox fulfills the B5 criteria. In fact, there is no requirement that any WP article must contain a photo; even an FA class. Brad (talk) 02:31, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe there is anything left to discuss. The b5 criteria has been met at least as far as the ships project is concerned. MilHiss can do whatever they feel is appropriate but milhist b5 criteria is the same as ships criteria. Next time just say "oops sorry" instead of edit warring and making mountains out of molehills. Brad (talk) 22:37, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]